Californian Elitist
Well-Known Member
WDW's 50th is coming up in just a few years. Makes a lot of sense that the company would want to invest at this time.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Guardians of the Galaxy - Monsters After Dark coming this Halloween
- Thread starter TP2000
- Start date
WDW's 50th is coming up in just a few years. Makes a lot of sense that the company would want to invest at this time.
Practical Pig
Well-Known Member
No, it's no surprise. While the practice has magnified over the years, it was installed from the beginning:
And It's just smart business practice.
George Lucas on a Bench
Well-Known Member
DisneyFan18
Well-Known Member
WARNING: Life is not to be experienced solely via YouTube, per TP2000!
That said, here's a good video of the new ride from start to finish!
SPOILER ALERT:
I never thought I'd say this, but I think it's hysterical when the raccoon says "Oh, crap." Just like I think it's time for the Blue Bayou to start serving wine with dinner, I think it's okay that a Disney character says something like that. Within the proper context of course, but this is the proper context. And it's funny!
It looks amazing, I wish I could go and experience it. This actually gives me hope for the GOTG attraction coming to Epcot.
Kram Sacul
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- Yes
You're forgetting that "Disneyland is a business" and also "Walt did it" which are the usual ways to dismiss someone from critiquing the current regime's questionable decisions.
Can't wait to ride Mission: Break Dance with Monsters!!1!
Last edited:
Curious Constance
Well-Known Member
Walt DID do it, and it IS a business specifically designed to make people money. Actually more so today that it ever was. But that doesn't mean that I have to be happy about it or think it's a GOOD long term strategy for the business. Just like toys tied to movies tend to end up on the clearance rack, this very well may end up cheapening the parks to the point that it's seen more as a Universal style park. Which in my eyes would be a huge loss. Universal is fun for a day every decade or so, but it certainly doesn't activate the same draw that Disney seems to in people. Hollywood is here one minute and gone the next, and if you base all your rides on Hollywood, you very well may be here one minute and gone the next too. They may end up pouring more money into rethemes just to keep relevant than they make up in synergy $$$.
No Name
Well-Known Member
I'm confused.
Notice there are arrows pointing in many directions. Today, Bob Iger and Co. see the parks as a way to propel studios franchises, not as their own medium of storytelling.
Synergy is good when it stems from more than one place.
Practical Pig
Well-Known Member
That chart is a snapshot in time, and relevant to the context that I responded to. Of course there are arrows pointing back and forth between various departments that were relevant to the business as it existed then. If such a charming flow chart were produced today it would obviously reflect flows that are relevant to the company that exists today. Of course this gigantic modern media corporation will advance their current corporate strategies instead of the strategies of the 1950's Mom and Pop operations of the Disney that produced that chart. Given all that, I don't see your point.
TROR
Well-Known Member
And here you have the problem so many people have. The Disney so many have loved is no longer the Disney that exists. Gone is the quaint, familiar charm of "Uncle Walt" and here's the stern hardness of Mr. Iger.
D
Deleted member 107043
Dear sweet honey child... You cannot blame Iger for something that disappeared long before he arrived on the scene. He's simply following a proven formula that patrons can't get enough of.
Practical Pig
Well-Known Member
Well, yeah. We can all wish we had a time machine and keep visiting that ideal moment in time in that ideal park of our yearning hearts. And I don't mean to upset any yearning hearts. I have one of my own.
Curious Constance
Well-Known Member
All the arrows are flowing from movies and going into the theme parks. There will be no more arrows flowing from the theme park out to anything else anymore. The theme parks if designed well could be an inspiration for movies (see POTC) books, shows, clothing lines, collectible merch, etc. But with all the arrows flowing into instead of out of the parks you've dried up that opportunity. I think the single flow arrows are working well now, but could be shortsighted. Wouldn't it be better to have the arrows flying in every direction? If people tire of having a movie shoved in their face at every turn, then what?
Last edited:
Practical Pig
Well-Known Member
No Name
Well-Known Member
Today, the Studios division is allowed to create original movies, but Parks and Resorts is no longer allowed to create original rides, and Interactive is no longer allowed to create original games. That's the problem... treating everything else as a tool for the studios.
The arrows are no longer flying in all directions like they used to, and like they shoud do to keep the company healthy.
Practical Pig
Well-Known Member
D
Deleted member 107043
He was, and I admire him because like Walt he was willing to take creative risks. The thing I always go back to though is that under Iger Disney is performing better than it ever has. Say what you will about the lack of creativity in investing in Studio IP attractions the numbers don't lie. Customers love it.
No Name
Well-Known Member
Of course that's to be expected.
But there's no good reason why, since Bob Iger became CEO, the US parks have been forbidden from creating a single original attraction. Soarin' was successful, Expedition Everest was successful... why did they suddenly stop? Why are they allowed to create new franchises on the big screen, but not in the theme parks? It makes absolutely no sense, it's simply a result of Bob Iger's opinion that theme parks are inferior.
People love quality. When Iger took over, the "rebounding" of quality came at the same time as the increase in studio IPs in the parks, and people confuse the two. People loved Soarin and Grizzly River Run because they were quality, and they didn't love the rest of the original DCA because it was not quality. There's little evidence that IP is the reason.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 107043
It's ironic that you use Soarin and Grizzly as examples of quality. When the park first opened a large number of online fans criticized Disney for being cheap with its execution of both rides. Personally I thought they were fine, but they were routinely trotted out as examples of Eisner cutting corners with theming and storytelling at DCA.
So you believe there's little evidence between the steady increase in attendance and profits at DLR with the expansion of Studio IP at the parks? You think that if Disney didn't extend the reach of Star Wars, Princesses, and Pixar characters and stories that the parks would be just as successful as they currently are?
Disney's IP is what sets it apart from other theme parks today. People visit Disney Parks now in part to relive experiences from their favorite Disney/Pixar/Marvel/SW characters. Like you I dislike the way that IP driven attractions have been shoehorned in everywhere, but there's no denying that from a business perspective the strategy is working quite well for the P&R BU. It's also pretty clear to me that customers want and expect these types of experiences.
Last edited by a moderator:
George Lucas on a Bench
Well-Known Member
Iger plays it so safe, there's no way they can't make money. What he's really exceptional at is repackaging everything and getting everyone to buy it again. I like that Wells and Eisner took risks. That's what Walt did. Sometimes they paid off. The way they operate the theme parks really isn't any different. In many ways, it's worse with Iger.